Poor sentence construction, subby. If I never thought that, I wouldn't have been wrong, it simply wouldn't have occurred to me. If instead you'd written, "If you thought you'd never live to see a deer with a basketball stuck in its antlers while taking a leak, well, you were wrong" then you would have been correct.

timujin:Poor sentence construction, subby. If I never thought that, I wouldn't have been wrong, it simply wouldn't have occurred to me. If instead you'd written, "If you thought you'd never live to see a deer with a basketball stuck in its antlers while taking a leak, well, you were wrong" then you would have been correct.

I wonder what evolutionary benefit or cost this will have for that buck. If hunters see this guy and think "I'm gonna leave basketball buck" alone then maybe all the other bucks will start putting basketballs between their antlers. Alternatively, a hunter might want the bragging rights for taking down basketball buck, mounting the basketball along with the head.

timujin:Poor sentence construction, subby. If I never thought that, I wouldn't have been wrong, it simply wouldn't have occurred to me. If instead you'd written, "If you thought you'd never live to see a deer with a basketball stuck in its antlers while taking a leak, well, you were wrong" then you would have been correct.

It still sounds like I have to be the one taking the leak whilst looking at the picture.

Rodeodoc:timujin: Poor sentence construction, subby. If I never thought that, I wouldn't have been wrong, it simply wouldn't have occurred to me. If instead you'd written, "If you thought you'd never live to see a deer with a basketball stuck in its antlers while taking a leak, well, you were wrong" then you would have been correct.

It still sounds like I have to be the one taking the leak whilst looking at the picture.

Good point, the "while" is extraneous. So... "If you thought you'd never live to see a deer with a basketball stuck in its antlers taking a leak, well, you were wrong."